Every learner belongs with their peers and deserves high expectations. For decades, inclusion advocates have championed this message, backed by research showing that students with disabilities do better, academically and socially, when they are full members of general education classrooms.
That belief gets tested most when a student is very young, and the systems around them start narrowing their future before anyone can know what that future should look like.
A recent Baltimore Banner article by Talia Richman shines a light on this issue. The article reports that roughly 1,660 Maryland students in pre-K through second grade have been identified this year to learn using the Maryland Alternate Framework.
This framework is made up of instruction aligned to alternate academic achievement standards and an alternate assessment aligned to those standards. The Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) and the Division of Early Intervention and Special Education Services (DEI/SES) developed the framework to ensure that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities receive appropriate instruction and assessments that support their learning and overall development.
This designation alone does not automatically mean a student cannot earn a diploma. However, once a student’s IEP has them on instruction and assessment aligned to the Essential Elements rather than the full state standards, they’re no longer accumulating the specific coursework and mastery that diploma requirements are built around. Maryland’s own compliance guidance states this directly: continued participation in instruction and assessment aligned to alternate academic achievement standards makes it unlikely that the student will meet the requirements for a Maryland high school diploma.
Federal law reserves this path for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities and caps participation at 1 percent. Last year, 1.13 percent of Maryland test-takers were on it, and the U.S. Department of Education has told the state its numbers aren’t moving in the right direction.
The Banner article focuses on how early, and how quietly, these decisions can happen. Students are being placed on this track years before they ever sit for a standardized test, often based on how they’re doing in a general education classroom that isn’t equipped to support their learning. Parents are often told this decision is better for their child, that grade-level standards and testing will put too much stress on them.
The real danger here is twofold: academic rigor and placement.
Along with the concern around the timing of these decisions is that alternate framework often gets tied to a less rigorous curriculum and a classroom apart from peers.
Academic rigor
Though challenging academics and the highest possible standards achievable are in the definition laid out by Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR), the alternate framework can lead to a less rigorous academic experience. In some school systems, there is also a focus on life or job skills over academic classes. One mother quoted in the article tells the story of her son being recommended for a program called Learning for Independence Services. In this district, the program description reads that students participate in real-world learning in the school and community settings with “opportunities to participate” in “instructional experiences” with their non-disabled peers.
Do the words “opportunities to participate” sound meaningful and mandatory? Do “instructional experiences” sound the same as challenging academic classes?
Placement
The unfortunate reality is that the decision about the alternate framework and academic placement is supposed to be independent, but in practice they’re often tightly bound together.
A COMAR regulatory document filed with the Maryland State Board (March 2026) states participation in the alternate framework and placement decisions must be wholly separate, however, 83% of students eligible for the alternate assessment are educated in separate classrooms or separate schools, compared to just 10% of students overall. The same document also notes that early eligibility determinations often lead students to more restrictive placements and less access to the full curriculum and content experts.
A student’s assessment — or the extent of the adaptations they need to access grade-level content — should never determine placement. Schools and systems that continue to link these decisions are contradicting their own state’s guidance and federal law.
No eligibility requirement for inclusion
A student taking the alternate assessment deserves the same access to grade-level content, general education peers, and high expectations as any other student. What changes is how that access is built, through the kind of co-teaching, specially designed instruction, and coaching that lets a school meet a student where they are without removing them from where they belong.
This is the work MCIE does with schools and districts every day: helping students stay in their home school, learn in general education settings alongside their peers, and find real belonging there. That means building the systems that hold high expectations for every student, regardless of which assessment they take.
More than just placement
A general education setting is a start. It isn’t the finish line. A student can sit in the same room as their peers all day and still not experience genuine inclusion and belonging. This doesn’t happen unless the team has thought through how they will access the content, participate in the lesson, and build relationships with classmates. This is true even for students who were included early on, and later identified for alternate assessment or a modified curriculum as they moved through school. Being present in a general education setting matters, but presence alone doesn’t guarantee belonging. A classroom becomes truly inclusive when the environment itself, the instruction, the supports, the expectations, is built to make sure every student has a genuine place in it, not just a seat.
Have a story from your school or district about how you approach these decisions? We’d love to hear it. Reach out to us at communications@mcie.org.
Resources
7 Myths About Inclusive Education
Debunks the myth that a diagnosis or disability determines placement, and states plainly that placement isn’t predetermined and LRE is based on student need, not label.
Collaborative Relationships
What co-teaching actually looks like in practice, and how general and special educators share responsibility for every student’s learning in the same classroom.
Making Action Plans (MAPs)
A planning process for families and educators who want to build a path toward more inclusion for a student who has been in a separate classroom.
The 5 Ps of Inclusive Education with Dr. Shelley Moore
Explores why placement and purposeful goals have to work together, with a real example of students with intellectual disabilities earning credit in a general education class once the environment was designed for them.